Shared experiences   Robert Leverett
  Oct 17, 2003 06:46 PDT 


ENTS:

    In my zeal to secure protection for Mohawk's beautiful pines, I
floated the idea of establishing a peace park within Mohawk to honor
international leaders of peace and all religions. However, we recognized
that this plan needed some testing, so we've taken a few small groups to
the pines to test out the concept of a peace park. The results have
caused us to begin back peddling. We find that the groups attracted to
this idea are so focused on human issues and human figures that the
trees become mere symbols. Although their intentions are noble, the
groups don't come with a sense of place or history. Trees remain
symbols. Animals are totems. So it is back to the drawing board. Any
ideas?
Re: Shared experiences   Don Bertolette
  Oct 17, 2003 19:35 PDT 

Bob-
If you're thinking long-term, I'd start getting the grade school kids coming
from as far as is reasonable, and other youth oriented groups...most modern
day environmentalists were weaned on folks like me teaching conservation in
the 1970's...the lessons you can teach them on a field trip are limitless,
and augmented by the native american dimension that you can bring to bear.
-Don
Re: Shared experiences   dbhg-@comcast.net
  Oct 18, 2003 04:08 PDT 

Don:

Thanks. we're seeking a path that provides protection without over-exposing the resource. The unrelenting attention that Friends has given the pines has been the primary source of their protection for the last 12 years, but with greatly increased logging in our state forests and the shift of the paradigm toward wood products use of our public woodlands, places that have been safe won't necessarily continue to be, unless they are specifically recognized as valuable for reasons other than timber.

The peace park idea had its beginnings in November 2001, and as an abstract concept, has appeal. But as I've tested the idea for almost two years purposely on a very small scale, I haven't been happy with what I've seen, so I'm backing off. The plan of continuing to name areas after Indian tribes and trees after individual Indians will continue. There is plenty of symbolism there that works to the benefit of the trees, but going that next step risks attracting people who see animals and trees just as symbols to use in the glorification of humans and human deeds. That is definitely NOT what I had in mind.

Bob
Nix on the peace park idea from Colby    dbhg-@comcast.net
   Oct 18, 2003 04:38 PDT 

ENTS:

Colby had me in stitches in his half serious response to the question about the advisability of a peace park at Mohawk Trail. He allows me to share it. Colby's vision is scary. Uh, haven't we all seen places such as he describes. Uh, I think there's one down the street.

Anyway, he has made his point most effectively. The peace park idea just got savaged. Gonzo! Caput. No more. We certainly don't want processions of glazed-eyed guru followers trampling the herbaceous plants. No tuned-in (or out-does it matter?) chanters disturbing the resident wild life. No concrete monuments. We just want our pines left to live through their natural life cycles.

Bob
  Bob,

Yep, a peace park at Mohawk Trail would be a dangerous idea. First, there
would be paved paths around all the trees for the cripples, a zillion feet
of deep trenching for water fountains, drainage and floodlights, several
parking lots, homeland security fences, visitors center, an auditorium,
sanitary facilities, a highway-speed traffic loop, massive regrading,
weed-free sod, and - well, you get the idea.

Peace is sort of a fuzzy theme, so the monuments would be varied at best.
Muslims might want a colossal recycled concrete statue of a past winner of
the Nobel peace prize - Chairman Arafat. This would include a weekly
fireworks display. Other monuments, for no obvious reasons, would include
Ronald Reagan, Fawn Hall, John Ashcroft, Clarence Thomas, James Watt, and
the Shrub. A supersized genuine authentic replica of the Alabama Ten
Commandments would be the big attraction, surpassing Samuel Colt's
"Peacemaker."

With all the construction, the big trees would start to die, and tree
experts would be summoned. They'd all be scared of being financially liable
for any damage caused by trees, so they'd unanimously recommend getting rid
of them. This is known as "Nero's thumb tree care." Someone would suggest
a win-win situation by selling the trees, and a forester would say that a
sale would be more attractive (profitable to him) if they added five hundred
more acres. Everyone would agree that was a fine idea - all free money,
with the prospect of selectively harvesting the rest of the timber down to a
four inch diameter limit as long-term management - not to exceed five years.

With the prospect of that much clearing, covering the mountain with ski
trails would be suggested by the local townsfolk, always looking for more
tourism. The rest of the property wouldn't go to waste; it would be open to
paint-ball warfare and all-terrain vehicles. A few hundred acres could be 
preserved for motorcycle courses, with plenty of parking for special events,
including the Mohawk Mud Classic.

Massive regrading and erosion would cause water quality problems, so most of
the lowland corridors - those still encumbered by trees - would be bulldozed
for stormwater retention ponds. The ponds would be supported by most of the
environmentalists, always interested in water quality and Bradford pears.
The rest would be swayed by a birdhouse proposal - plastic birdhouses of
both "Graceland" and "Country Outhouse" design. All birdhouses would have
pinwheels on top and be mounted on aluminum poles with metalflake finish.

Of course, engineers hate curves, so the ponds would be perfectly
rectangular, and surrounded by chainlink fence topped with razor wire for
safety. This would also provide emergency detention of the elderly,
especially those suspected of terrorism. Maintenance would create more
seasonal jobs having little effect on the local economy. Mexican laborw
ould be bused in to keep the pond enclosures well mowed, and weeds sprayed
along the chainlink fences. The results would be quite popular; you can't
have too much neatness and tidiness these days.

With all the infrastructure, the park would be quite a showplace, deserving
of several new roads leading to scenic overlooks where visitors could
admire the new layout, and buy postcards and Slurpees. This would require
clearing of superfluous vegetation for vistas of the massive landfill, the
new sewer plant, maintenance complex, bingo center and tour bus shopping
mall. The mall would be a model of privatization, with no discrimination in
hiring, provided no one spoke English. The mall would be a hit with little
ladies with blue hair. They would buy candles, potpourri, sweetgum balls
and religious items. A nodding-head Jesus and Jerry Falwell salad dressing
would be the big sellers.

Since no one's likely to visit the peace memorial auditorium, it could be
converted into a wax museum - Great Hacks in Wax, honoring all the state
politicians, thereby guaranteeing funding for more improvements to a once
useless area infested by trees.

Colby

 
RE: Nix on the peace park idea from Colby    Joseph Zorzin
   Oct 18, 2003 07:58 PDT 


dbhg-@comcast.net wrote:
 
ENTS:

   Colby had me in stitches in his half serious response to the question
   about the advisability of a peace park at Mohawk Trail. He allows me to
   share it. Colby's vision is scary. Uh, haven't we all seen places such
   as he describes. Uh, I think there's one down the street.

   Anyway, he has made his point most effectively. The peace park idea just
   got savaged. Gonzo! Caput. No more. We certainly don't want processions
   of glazed-eyed guru followers trampling the herbaceous plants. No
   tuned-in (or out-does it matter?) chanters disturbing the resident wild
   life. No concrete monuments. We just want our pines left to live through
   their natural life cycles.

Bob
  Bob,

Yep, a peace park at Mohawk Trail would be a dangerous idea. First,
there
would be paved paths around all the trees for the cripples, a zillion
feet
of deep trenching for water fountains, drainage and floodlights, several
parking lots, homeland security fences, visitors center, an auditorium,
sanitary facilities, a highway-speed traffic loop, massive regrading,
weed-free sod, and - well, you get the idea.


Wow, I thought this list serv had no cynics, other than myself. However,
it's not necessarily true that all those bad things would happen with a
peace park- they could- but don't have to- it all depends on having
great people in charge of the parks/forests. (JZ)
 
 
Peace is sort of a fuzzy theme, so the monuments would be varied at
best.
Muslims might want a colossal recycled concrete statue of a past winner
of
the Nobel peace prize - Chairman Arafat. This would include a weekly
fireworks display. Other monuments, for no obvious reasons, would
include
Ronald Reagan, Fawn Hall, John Ashcroft, Clarence Thomas, James Watt,
and
the Shrub.



How about Abbie Hoffman, Tim Leary, Alan Watts, Stephen Jay Gould, Carl
Sagan, HDT, Budha and..... uh, nah, if there's going to be a statue, it
should be of Burl-belly and his wife Janny (sp?)!!! (JZ)



A supersized genuine authentic replica of the Alabama Ten
 
  Commandments would be the big attraction, surpassing Samuel Colt's
"Peacemaker."

  With all the construction, the big trees would start to die, and tree
experts would be summoned. They'd all be scared of being financially
liable
for any damage caused by trees, so they'd unanimously recommend getting
rid
of them. This is known as "Nero's thumb tree care." Someone would
suggest
a win-win situation by selling the trees, and a forester would say that
a
sale would be more attractive (profitable to him) if they added five
hundred
more acres.



Ayup, never can trust them there fur-isters, after all, they do get
brain damage at forestry schools! <G> (JZ)



Everyone would agree that was a fine idea - all free money,
 
  with the prospect of selectively harvesting the rest of the timber down
to a
four inch diameter limit as long-term management - not to exceed five
years.



That's why you'd have to get only Forest Stewards Guild type foresters,
then you MIGHT have a chance of great forestry. (JZ)
 
 
With the prospect of that much clearing, covering the mountain with ski
trails would be suggested by the local townsfolk, always looking for
more
tourism. The rest of the property wouldn't go to waste; it would be
open to
paint-ball warfare and all-terrain vehicles. A few hundred acres could
be

  preserved for motorcycle courses, with plenty of parking for special
events,
including the Mohawk Mud Classic.

Massive regrading and erosion would cause water quality problems, so
most of
the lowland corridors - those still encumbered by trees - would be
bulldozed
for stormwater retention ponds. The ponds would be supported by most of
the
environmentalists, always interested in water quality and Bradford
pears.
The rest would be swayed by a birdhouse proposal - plastic birdhouses of
both "Graceland" and "Country Outhouse" design. All birdhouses would
have
pinwheels on top and be mounted on aluminum poles with metalflake
finish.


Wow, that's a masterpiece of cynicism, I can't hold a candle to that.
<G> (JZ)
 
 
Of course, engineers hate curves, so the ponds would be perfectly
rectangular, and surrounded by chainlink fence topped with razor wire
for
safety. This would also provide emergency detention of the elderly,
especially those suspected of terrorism. Maintenance would create more
seasonal jobs having little effect on the local economy. Mexican labor

  would be bused in to keep the pond enclosures well mowed, and weeds
sprayed
along the chainlink fences. The results would be quite popular; you
can't
have too much neatness and tidiness these days.

With all the infrastructure, the park would be quite a showplace,
deserving
of several new roads leading to scenic overlooks where visitors could
admire the new layout, and buy postcards and Slurpees. This would
require
clearing of superfluous vegetation for vistas of the massive landfill,
the
new sewer plant, maintenance complex, bingo center and tour bus shopping
mall. The mall would be a model of privatization, with no
discrimination in
hiring, provided no one spoke English. The mall would be a hit with
little
ladies with blue hair. They would buy candles, potpourri, sweetgum
balls
and religious items. A nodding-head Jesus and Jerry Falwell salad
dressing
would be the big sellers.

Since no one's likely to visit the peace memorial auditorium, it could
be




Of course, if the entire peace park thing was WELL DESIGNED, your
nightmares wouldn't come true. I like the idea of a peace park. We'd
just have to make sure that Burl-belly is The King of the Park with
totalitarian control. (JZ)
 
  converted into a wax museum - Great Hacks in Wax, honoring all the state
politicians, thereby guaranteeing funding for more improvements to a
once
useless area infested by trees.

Colby
RE: Shared experiences    Ed Frank
   Oct 19, 2003 18:21 PDT 

Bob,

I think the transcendental experiences people have with trees are a
solitary experience. I am not sure it can be translated into a group
activity. I think the idea of a Peace park is a good one. Once a park
has been established, named, given some intelectual reality, then people
who visit the park, later on their own time and terms will have the
oppurtunity to have those experiences. I don't believe it has anything
to do with totems, animals versus trees, or any such thing. It is an
experience that must be engendered from within, ususally in private.
Threafter the experience can be recounted even in the presence of
others. I don't know if an area or grove can be presented to a group
with any expectation of such feelings, but it can provide an
introduction to start the internal process that creates these
experiences.

Ed
Re: Shared experiences, Peace Parks   Greentr-@aol.com
  Oct 19, 2003 20:15 PDT 
All,
Gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen...I do believe we may be missing a bigger
picture here (as admirable as highlighting, and "possibly" preserving, a specific
grove, in remembrance of the original Americans, may be). I have not
followed this thread, and have not invested any capital...as of yet. I am but
speaking off the cuff, from the periphery. Just let me say, most possibly to my own
peril, "education" of the masses may be the larger goal to target (let
favorite grove spotlighting and native American nostalgia go along for the ride!).
Even should Colby's dissenting synopsis be most fully realized, why not
sacrifice the few to preserve the many? How so? If you're able to win over an army
of fans, "everyone's" job just got easier. For a time...we may be able to
safely tuck-away, in the vast under-explored recesses of our minds, isolated old
growth remnants, while the whole Planet is "highgraded" into dwarf forests.
But if we can bring these potential ecologists on board, by letting them into
our postage-stamp size world, seeing what we see, how we see it, walking a
mile in our moccasins, they may well open their hearts, as well as their
pocketbooks. Isn't that what many of us want?   No insult intended, but what the heck
good does it do to share like celestial cerebral flights of fantasy, if the
bigger world is uneffected? Darn it! I want to change the world I live in!   
If need be, put out some arsenic boardwalks and some tree "cages". Invite
construction-related injury. Foot-traffic compaction. Souvenir taking. Heck,
even some beech bark vandalism (don't you just love to read how much "Suzy luvs
Billy-bob?"). But let's get people involved in what we do. Gentlemen, we
seem to share the same incurable, "quarantined" affliction; we love trees. I
say, in spite of the present age of irresponsibility, "Let's make this disease
social!". Let's infect the masses any and all ways possible. I'm not
advocating a mere rebellion...heck no. I am inciting a full-scale invasion!!!
Just a few more eccentric rantings,

Randy